Being sent home from new job after old job gave info on my previous employment

LegacyUser

I really need advice please. I started a new job a couple of days ago. I left in my last job due to problems of constantly being in trouble and being harrassed for very small things (like not being 5 mins early, but still being on time, my clothes were black but not black enough,speaking to fellow colleagues, allowing colleagues to have a conversation between themselves on my area which i am not even in charge of), I did something small wrong that a few people have done but only received a conversation asking them not to again but i was suspended. I know we're not supposed to and i do accept i did something wrong but i feel that the harsh action taken on me is not due solely to my behaviour but because the manager does not like me and has been treating me very very poorly for a long time.

I gave my notice after i thought that even if i pass the investigation i would cry inside at the idea of going back there, really was having panic attacks thinking of it.i got a job and after working for a couple of days the hr person told me to leave as they were taking back approval for me to work there. When i asked why i have been told that they rang my old employer and the previous employer told my new employer all the details of disciplinary, suspension and investigation, and now my new employer doesn't want to have me there anymore.

I feel quite upset as firstly i felt very harrassed in my old job and know that other people who did what i did were only told not to do it again. Secondly i feel that what i did was in a previous job and can't understand how i can punished for it by a diffierent employer. Third i did not give the new employer a list of references, they rang from my cv. Fourth i did not think that under data protection that the old employer was allowed to give any information from me. any advice?

tatli_lokma

well other posters will know more, as they have posted on this issue before. But from the information I have seen, your past employer can only give information on things which they can prove factually to be true. So unless they can provide documented evidence of your disciplinary they should not have mentioned it.

Have you spoken to the HR in the new company since? perhaps, contact them, ask to come in for a chat. Explain in a calm, professional and reasonable manner what the situation was. Try to leave emotion aside, and instead give them details and facts of the issues. Ask them to reconsider their decision. If you have already signed a contract perhaps look at this - whilst given you are there such a short time they can essentially let you go at any time, if there is a contract with minimum notice periods then they should honour them. Also if the offer was subject to reference checks this should have been made clear at the time of offer. If they allowed you to sign a contract without checking your references then HR aren't doing their job very well.

If that doesn't work, I know its tough being out of work, but perhaps its for the best. If the HR in the new place behaves in this manner making a decision on unsubstantiated claims and not giving you the right to reply it might be an indication of how they treat their staff in other ways and if so you are better than that.

Teyla Emmagan

That absolutely sucks. I don't have much, but maybe if you could afford it you could get a solicitor's letter sent to the old employer stating that you will sue them for loss of earnings if they make such statements about you again. Because it sounds totally like what they said was unwarranted (and possibly vindictive). As Little Ted says, it doesn't say much for the HR department in your new place either. I would definitely ask to speak to them again though, if for nothing else to defend your own reputation.

Good luck.

Faolchu

i find it strange that the new company would make a reference check after you'd already started with them and contracts signed etc.

a call to teh DPC will answer your question about what information a former employer can provide

[Jackass]

I'd definitely go and speak to a solicitor. Call for rates, but an initial consoltation may be free or a few quid (no more than a GP visit), but you may well have grounds for legal action here. I would definitely investigate this with a local solicitor.

There are various points of slander, here say, loss of earnings and within employment law I'm sure that it is not permitted to give a negative reference (i.e. they can't say you were useless and also they ask the question "would you employ this person again" as a way around it) and you were not given right of reply and any disciplinary matters that may have concluded should have notified you and given you a right to challenge and if no investigation was completed, then what they said was blatant gossip.

doolox

....seems to their way of mind to be legitimate but if employees act in a concerted way and try to control their labour in an organised way it is heavily frowned upon by a lot of employers and not encouraged if outright banned in most private employments. I have always found references and opinions of previous employments to be demeaning and harking back to the bad old days of bonded labour and serfdom. A complete contradiction to the free market and liberal capitalism beloved by most employers........

You should not have to ask for or seek your previous employers permission to change jobs. They should not have the means to deprive you of your present employment. They certainly should not be able to deprive you of a livelihood. As mentioned in other replies the HR dept seems remiss in taking as the whole truth whatever was said about you in the previous employment so that the company you are now in are probably not good to work for. They could not see that the possibility exists of a piece of revenge against you in giving an unfavourable reference. They are not willing to give you a chance to "redeem yourself", if such is needed. At least they should have given you the "right to reply" to any charges levelled against you in a meeting before deciding to send you home.

You will have to be streetwise and if possible try and get more "favourable" referees than the 2 last employments. If possible try and control the content of any reference by picking only "decent" supervisors etc. This might not be possible if you spent a long time in any assignment or you are new to the jobs market.

The lesson to be learnt in all this is not to spend too long in any problematic or adverse employment because it is easier to hide short periods of bad experiences than to hide long ones. If you are not fitting in, find the work hard to contend with or the people in charge to be too difficult or demanding then get out quickly before it becomes too difficult to hide on your CV.

As a guide you can always hide one or two months in a CV but 6 months or more is difficult and leads to problems hard to hide.

the_syco

Did you use the previous manager as a reference? And if so, why?

nikkime

Yeh, you shouldnt have used the previous manager as a reference - alas a cv should be skewed in favour of the jobs/courses youve done well on - and remain free from any aberrations on your part...

I'm not sure about going down the solicitor road - I think youd be best off having a chat with your present employer and see if theyd reconsider - perhaps on a trial basis - but if not then take the lesson of not using toxic references

tatli_lokma

canihavesomeadvicepleasethanks wrote: »

I Third i did not give the new employer a list of references, they rang from my cv. Fourth i did not think that under data protection that the old employer was allowed to give any information from me. any advice?

the_syco wrote: »

Did you use the previous manager as a reference? And if so, why?

nikkime wrote: »

Yeh, you shouldnt have used the previous manager as a reference - alas a cv should be skewed in favour of the jobs/courses youve done well on - and remain free from any aberrations on your part...

I'm not sure about going down the solicitor road - I think youd be best off having a chat with your present employer and see if theyd reconsider - perhaps on a trial basis - but if not then take the lesson of not using toxic references

OP didn't give their old manager as a reference and in fact didn't give permission for any references to be contacted. Rather than the new employer checking with OP which referees she would like to give, they went and used her CV to get their own references without her knowledge. This is really unfair IMO. The new employer should have said - we will be contacting your last two employers or should have asked OP for preferred referees. She was basically ambushed by this and sacked due to the old managers bad reference. The new employer also should have had the decency to give her the right to reply.

I think morally and even perhaps technically you have a legal case in this matter. But in reality the legal route won't get you anywhere and could just cost you money. I would however contact your old employer in writing reminding them that any comments they make about you needs to be backed up with factual evidence and ask for a copy of such records under the data protection act. They probably won't give it, but it will let them know you are wise to them and they might think twice about giving a bad reference of you without any factual evidence of their claims.

the_syco

canihavesomeadvicepleasethanks wrote: »

i did not give the new employer a list of references, they rang from my cv

Hrm... this is gray area.

How was the tone/language towards the previous job in your CV, and what sort of answer did you give, in reference to leaving the previous job.

I ask as they seem to have gotten suspicious that something was up, and rang your old employer about it. If it happens once, it could happen again, so you may want to get advice on what to say on your CV/in an interview from someone who has knowledge in that are.

Shelflife

Little Ted wrote: »

OP didn't give their old manager as a reference and in fact didn't give permission for any references to be contacted. Rather than the new employer checking with OP which referees she would like to give, they went and used her CV to get their own references without her knowledge. This is really unfair IMO. The new employer should have said - we will be contacting your last two employers or should have asked OP for preferred referees. She was basically ambushed by this and sacked due to the old managers bad reference. The new employer also should have had the decency to give her the right to reply.

I think morally and even perhaps technically you have a legal case in this matter. But in reality the legal route won't get you anywhere and could just cost you money. I would however contact your old employer in writing reminding them that any comments they make about you needs to be backed up with factual evidence and ask for a copy of such records under the data protection act. They probably won't give it, but it will let them know you are wise to them and they might think twice about giving a bad reference of you without any factual evidence of their claims.

The new employer does not need permission to contact the previous employer, nor is it unfair , its standard practice to check out the previous employment and get the employers perspective.

i took on a girl who was sacked from her previous employment, i rang her old boss and i believed her over what he had to say. Be upfront with any possible issues with the previous employer.

Its my opinion that there is no point going down the legal route, unless the previous employer has foolishly written defametory comments to the new employer you are merely going on heresay.

tatli_lokma

Shelflife wrote: »

The new employer does not need permission to contact the previous employer, nor is it unfair , its standard practice to check out the previous employment and get the employers perspective.

Well in most instances it is considered basic manners to advise the employee that you will be contacting their last employer. I would say that it is standard practice to get references, but it does not always have to be from the most recent employer, although this is the usual route. When requesting references, if you feel it important that at least one reference be from the last employer then you should let the employee know this. It is common courtesy to let the new employee know that you will be making contact. At that point they can then tell you that there may be an issue and offer other referees as a balance to the possibly one bad one.

I personally would not go behind the employees back and contact somewhere from there CV for a reference - I would let them know whom I will be contacting. If they have a problem with that they can let me know. I would also let the employee give me their chosen referees. Perhaps I am like this because I have been on both sides. I had a manager who I wouldn't list as a referee - not because I did a bad job or they would slate me, but because another manager would know me better and give a better reference. Had a prospective employer just gone ahead and phoned my old place of work, I might not have been successful in getting the job.

If I had any suspicions I would of course contact the most recent employer, but I would let the employee know I was doing this.

I would also not allow someone to start without first checking these references.

Shelflife

the first reference i would check would be his previous employer, if he didnt bother nominating a particular referee then i would assume that there is only one person that could give a reference.

Its nothing to do with basic manners its basic common sense and standard practise, if you worked somewhere for 2 years and then 8 years in your last job why would you contact someone who may not even remember them for a reference.

Op should have cut this off at the pass instead of hoping that it would slip through.

Their CV is giving evidence to the employer, you do not have to ask for "permission" to check out the details on it, it is not "going behind" someones back to check and see if they actually did work at a particular place or if they did graduate with hons from a Uni.

ABajaninCork

I just put 'References on request' on my CV. I have no problem with referees being contacted and assume the last employer will be contacted anyway. But doing it this way gives me control over the way these referees are contacted.

Maybe you should try that next time OP?

ABajaninCork

ABajaninCork wrote: »

I just put 'References on request' on my CV. I have no problem with referees being contacted and assume the last employer will be contacted anyway. But doing it this way gives me control over the way these referees are contacted.

Maybe you should try that next time OP?

OP wrote:

Third i did not give the new employer a list of references, they rang from my cv.

.

theg81der

Why don`t you get someone you know to ring for a reference and see what old company said so you know what your up against?

ABajaninCork

@Bluewolf.

I have assumed that the OP has put contact numbers on their CV. I've seen that plenty of times. Otherwise , I wonder how the new employer got hold of the 'correct' people to contact? Hence my comment.

ABajaninCork

ABajaninCork wrote: »

@Bluewolf.

I have assumed that the OP has put contact numbers on their CV. I've seen that plenty of times. Otherwise , I wonder how the new employer got hold of the 'correct' people to contact? Hence my comment.

ah i'd say it's easy enough to go "they worked at X? right i'll ring X and ask what area they worked in" etc

ABajaninCork

Perhaps I'm too English....

Employers at home can't be bothered to do all that. They simply ask the candidate for the contact info if it's not already on the CV.

Shelflife

As an employer I hate the references on request approach.

I like a full CV with all the relevant information on it, to be references on request says im too lazy to update my CV.

As we handle cash, the first thing im going to do is check out the references.

looksee

While I am sorry for your trouble OP, what is the point of a CV if the new employer cannot check its accuracy?

Your post reads

I really need advice please. I started a new job a couple of days ago. I left in my last job due to problems of constantly being in trouble and being harrassed for very small things (like not being 5 mins early, but still being on time, my clothes were black but not black enough,speaking to fellow colleagues, allowing colleagues to have a conversation between themselves on my area which i am not even in charge of), I did something small wrong that a few people have done but only received a conversation asking them not to again but i was suspended. I know we're not supposed to and i do accept i did something wrong but i feel that the harsh action taken on me is not due solely to my behaviour but because the manager does not like me and has been treating me very very poorly for a long time.

I would read a lot of 'interpreting the facts' going on here. The fact that 'everyone else does it' is not an excuse for you doing it. If 'everyone else' left they would probably also have issues with references. You have said yourself that you have 'constantly been in trouble' and 'i do accept i did something wrong ', and in consequence you were dismissed.

It kind of sounds like the new employer was giving you the benefit of the doubt, but didn't like what they saw and are using the excuse of the references to remove you. I think you need to have a very serious look at your behaviour in the first couple of days. Did you do a lot of 'just asking someone' and 'just trying to be friendly' when you were supposed to be getting the hang of the job?

I think the best you can do is contact your new employers, apologise for any issues - indeed ask what they were - undertake to show that you are competent and reliable and ask to be allowed to go back to your job, then get on with it. Don't get into how unfairly you were treated and how the boss didn't like you, even if its true it is not the kind of thing a new boss wants to hear.

If you are sure that in the last job you were being unfairly treated, then find a couple of people, previous employers, personal references, and ask if the new employer will contact them to support your claim. But that is what you should have done in the first place.

ABajaninCork

Shelflife wrote: »

As an employer I hate the references on request approach.

I like a full CV with all the relevant information on it, to be references on request says im too lazy to update my CV.

As we handle cash, the first thing im going to do is check out the references.

Not at all. It's stupid and lazy to assume that. My CV is regularly updated thank you. It does not mean that my CV is no more or less 'full' than anyone else's!! There might be a 1001 reasons why the references aren't given on a CV. In my case, as my former employer was a multi-national, it's quite a long process to obtain a reference, and I have to give written permission every time. So I don't give the references out until the prospective employer asks for them.

tatli_lokma

ABajaninCork wrote: »

Not at all. It's stupid and lazy to assume that. My CV is regularly updated thank you. It does not mean that my CV is no more or less 'full' than anyone else's!! There might be a 1001 reasons why the references aren't given on a CV. In my case, as my former employer was a multi-national, it's quite a long process to obtain a reference, and I have to give written permission every time. So I don't give the references out until the prospective employer asks for them.

+1

Also, I will not put references on my CV as until I have a firm offer, I may not want my current employer knowing I am applying for jobs.

A reference is a different thing to getting confirmation that you worked there. If you are just looking for confirmation, then I suppose it is ok to ring somewhere on the CV to check a)if they did actually work there b)if they had the position they claim. Other than that, if you want personal references, then you should allow the prospective employee the chance to provide their preferred references. If you don't want them being selective, then you can state that the job offer is subject to receiving a personal reference from your most recent employer. But until you are prepared to make an offer (conditional on a reference check) I don't think you should be ringing places on the CV.

My other half worked in a hotel when he first came to Ireland. It was almost 4 years ago and he only worked there for 6 mths. When he changed jobs 2 mths ago, the new employer rang the hotel to check he worked there (they told him they would do this). The manager in the hotel didn't remember him! well didn't remember the name I would say, I reckon if he could put a face to the name he would remember. They said that they would get "someone in the office to check and phone back" but never did. Anyway, if you took the approach Shelflife took it would look really bad for him. As it was the new employer told him about this, and as proof of working there hubby showed them an old P60 and payslips. The fact that my hubby knew the employer would contact the hotel meant that he was able to search out old payslips etc because he knew that there might be a problem.

Shelflife

Fair enough, personally it annoys me I can understand the multinational bit being awkward and really at that stage you are only going to (usually) get a generic reference.

Little ted I use the ref as one of my main selection processes, take in 30 applications, pick out the 10 best , check their references and interview 5.

Im not talking about their current job and im not talking about high end highly qualified jobs either.

More information can be got over a quick call then a formal letter stating that little ted worked here for x period. you also have to make allowances in jobs where alot of people would work in an area (like a hotel) and may not be remembered. (can be a good thing too).

ABC its neither lazy or stupid, the references are important to me, im not going to employ you without checking it out, to me its a simple thing if theres a process to go through then outline it in the reference section, if i think your worth it ill follow it through.

No need to make more work for a potential employer, not in this economy anyway.

tatli_lokma

Shelflife wrote: »

Little ted I use the ref as one of my main selection processes, take in 30 applications, pick out the 10 best , check their references and interview 5.

..........

No need to make more work for a potential employer, not in this economy anyway.

Would you not give 5 interviews based upon their experience/suitability for the role based upon their CV and use your own impression of the person at the interview as your starting point. Then when you have say 5 down to 2, check the references of the two you have shortlisted. The main selection process for most people is first CV, then interview, then reference check. It would seem to me that you are actually giving yourself more work - contacting references for 10 people when you could just interview your top 5 based on CV and then check references for 2.

I think your method would not be the norm - most employers (even SMEs) would use the CV as a starting point. If this is not what works for you, then perhaps state in your advert that CV should be accompanied by 2 written references and contact number so the references can be confirmed.

If the references are your main selection criteria then you should let prospective employees know this so that they can present you with the correct people to talk to. As I am sure you well know, some people when under stress can be a bit ratty. If you phoned an old manager of mine on the wrong day, she would probably ball you out of it and also not give a glowing reference for me, probably just a basic yes she worked here and she was fine sort of thing! having said that, get her on a good day, or schedule a time to call her that suited her and I know she would sing my praises. I just think that if references are so important to you in your selection process you should be letting applicants know this and give them the opportunity to give you specific names of references, rather than you contacting old employers on spec and possibly speaking to the wrong person, or at the wrong time.

the groutch

canihavesomeadvicepleasethanks wrote: »

I really need advice please. I started a new job a couple of days ago. I left in my last job due to problems of constantly being in trouble and being harrassed for very small things (like not being 5 mins early, but still being on time, my clothes were black but not black enough,speaking to fellow colleagues, allowing colleagues to have a conversation between themselves on my area which i am not even in charge of), I did something small wrong that a few people have done but only received a conversation asking them not to again but i was suspended. I know we're not supposed to and i do accept i did something wrong but i feel that the harsh action taken on me is not due solely to my behaviour but because the manager does not like me and has been treating me very very poorly for a long time.

defintely need legal advice, there may be grounds for constructive dismissals here.

Teyla Emmagan

Shelflife wrote: »

Little ted I use the ref as one of my main selection processes, take in 30 applications, pick out the 10 best , check their references and interview 5.

I have to say I think this is really unfair. IMO you should not check references unless you are actually thinking about making an offer. I consider that my referees are doing me a favour by giving me a good reference. Completing a reference can take a lot of time (I've seen pages of forms to be filled in etc), I would hate to think of them being bothered by someone who is essentially just taking their time up because it makes their own selection process easier.

barney 20v

We had a guy start with us and 4 weeks later he was called into a HR meeting and promptly dismissed !
He had been involved in an incicident at his previous work that resulted in damage to property.
We have since heard that although accidental, the damage was not owned up to by this guy or the two other people on that shift.
All three were disciplined equally but not sacked.

He got a start with us some six months later and someone rang up our HR and explained what had happened, he was removed from the building within 30 min.
It seemed harsh to me as he seemed keen, skilled and likeable!
He had gone through Four apptitude tests,five interviews and a medical, his references had been checked and verified and he had a full time contract in a position that more or less is a job for life!
It happens OP and it happens in huge companys also.

Shelflife

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

I have to say I think this is really unfair. IMO you should not check references unless you are actually thinking about making an offer. I consider that my referees are doing me a favour by giving me a good reference. Completing a reference can take a lot of time (I've seen pages of forms to be filled in etc), I would hate to think of them being bothered by someone who is essentially just taking their time up because it makes their own selection process easier.

I would say that the references we are talking about are two different things.

Most references that i get and give on a regular basis are on an informal basis and done over the phone. I tend to find out alot more that way then a more formal wriiten approach, so its not taking up much of anybodies time.

Theres nothing worse then interviewing someone, thinking that they are the answer to your prayers and when you check their reference you find that their 6mths in a particular store was work experience from school on a fri evening or that they were sacked for being dishonest.

Tombo2001

barney 20v wrote: »

We had a guy start with us and 4 weeks later he was called into a HR meeting and promptly dismissed !
He had been involved in an incicident at his previous work that resulted in damage to property.
We have since heard that although accidental, the damage was not owned up to by this guy or the two other people on that shift.
All three were disciplined equally but not sacked.

He got a start with us some six months later and someone rang up our HR and explained what had happened, he was removed from the building within 30 min.
It seemed harsh to me as he seemed keen, skilled and likeable!
He had gone through Four apptitude tests,five interviews and a medical, his references had been checked and verified and he had a full time contract in a position that more or less is a job for life!
It happens OP and it happens in huge companys also.

I think thats appalling.

They accepted him out of a job where he was permanent, offered him a job, didnt do their homework on him before they took him on, and then sacked him based on what he had done in the past after they took him on.

Really poor, in this day and age when people are struggling with mortgages, struggling with loan repayments and so on, to treat someones livelihood so flippantly is reckless.

theg81der

barney 20v wrote: »

We had a guy start with us and 4 weeks later he was called into a HR meeting and promptly dismissed !
He had been involved in an incicident at his previous work that resulted in damage to property.
We have since heard that although accidental, the damage was not owned up to by this guy or the two other people on that shift.
All three were disciplined equally but not sacked.

He got a start with us some six months later and someone rang up our HR and explained what had happened, he was removed from the building within 30 min.
It seemed harsh to me as he seemed keen, skilled and likeable!
He had gone through Four apptitude tests,five interviews and a medical, his references had been checked and verified and he had a full time contract in a position that more or less is a job for life!
It happens OP and it happens in huge companys also.

Hope he sues!!

Mrs OBumble

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I think thats appalling.

They accepted him out of a job where he was permanent, offered him a job, didnt do their homework on him before they took him on, and then sacked him based on what he had done in the past after they took him on.

Really poor, in this day and age when people are struggling with mortgages, struggling with loan repayments and so on, to treat someones livelihood so flippantly is reckless.

There are two sides to every story.

Presumably he was asked at interview "why did you leave your last job" - and lied.

tatli_lokma

JustMary wrote: »

There are two sides to every story.

Presumably he was asked at interview "why did you leave your last job" - and lied.

As does everyone who leaves a job where they are unhappy or there was an incident. No one who expects to get a job will answer that question by saying 'well my boss was a tosser and I couldn't stand him'. That is why I don't bother asking that question - you will never get an honest answer. Better to ask, why are you applying for this job and what do you think you can get from this role that you could not get in your current/last role?

barney 20v wrote: »

We had a guy start with us and 4 weeks later he was called into a HR meeting and promptly dismissed !
He had been involved in an incicident at his previous work that resulted in damage to property.
We have since heard that although accidental, the damage was not owned up to by this guy or the two other people on that shift.
All three were disciplined equally but not sacked.

He got a start with us some six months later and someone rang up our HR and explained what had happened, he was removed from the building within 30 min.
It seemed harsh to me as he seemed keen, skilled and likeable!
He had gone through Four apptitude tests,five interviews and a medical, his references had been checked and verified and he had a full time contract in a position that more or less is a job for life!
It happens OP and it happens in huge companys also.

From Barney's quote he was involved with an 'incident' and neither he nor the others owned up to it. Perhaps they were not guilty, or there were mitigating circumstances and that is why they did not own up to it. They also were not sacked but disciplined - possibly because it could not be acertained who exactly caused the damage and due to it beig accidental. As you say, there are two sides to every story so I hope that this guy was given the right to reply, just as OP should have been given. I also hope that the old company had clear evidence of this alleged wrong doing and subsequent disciplinary and it was on the basis of having proof that they gave the negative reference - otherwise as you know this guy could indeed sue. And it seems that the new place DID check is references, was happy with them, but someone being vindictive phoned them and ratted him out. To sack someone on this basis would be very unfair. It could of course be that in the meeting with HR the guy admitted to something which in turn made it impossible to keep him on, but there is no way to know this.